Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

philosophy of religion > teleological argument > Flashcards

teleological argument Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Religion Crash Course flashcards
1
Q

epicurean hypothesis

A

-finite particles given infinite time will eventually form order
-Hume adapted idea from Epicurus greek philosopher

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

strengths of aquinas fifth way

A

-examples in nature of non thinking beings acting towards purpose- sunflowers turning to get sunlight
-arrow needs archer to direct it - reasonable to assume natural things directed to purpose
-need explanation for purpose- sign of conscious mind that plans an end within its design

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

weakness of aquinas fifth way

A

-other reasons for purpose- evolved to suit role, looks like design but less adapted beings died out
-assumption of purpose, could be due to chance or natural things dont have innate purpose, might be human construct
-caused logical fallacy, leap to god of classical theism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

what did aquinas observe about world

A

things dont behave randomly but towards certain purpose or end ( telos)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

example of goal directed beings in nature

A

sunlight moves towards sun to get more sun
-acorn can grow into oak tree
-water falls as rain and goes part of water cycle
-planets orbit sun

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

aquinas conclusion of things being goal directed

A

-not by chance that objects behave with purpose
-things in world cant direct themself towards telos
-thing cannot move without purpose unless intelligent being that has purpose in mind directed thing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

arrow analogy

A

arrow hits target even though not intelligent
-must be something that can comprehend goal of arrow that influenced it to move that way

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

god directing things to purpose aquinas

A

-god directs behaviour of objects by creating natural laws which govern and regulate movement of objects
-god has power to make everything goal directed
-must be archer for arrow of universe which is god

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

P1 P2 and C1 of aquinas fifth way

A

-behaviour of objects goal directed towards an end because they follow natural laws
-natural laws cant create themselves because not intelligent
-natural laws must have intelligent designer- god

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

paleys pocket watch

A

-watch constructed with togs and clogs with purpose of telling time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

design qua purpose

A

paley compares mechanical watch with natural things
-eyes
brain
fish fins

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what did paley conclude from design qua purpose

A

-conclude of conscious mind intentionally designed purpose
-designer god

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

design qua regularity -

A

-consistent purpose shown everywhere in nature
-gravity
orbits of planets

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

arguments for paleys observations showing god exists

A

-a designer knows what they want to create, give creation purpose, purpose shows designer
-purpose seen in nature- birds, fish , eyes
-design qua regularity observed through order and patterns in nature, god behinf regularity
-even if watch broken, still designer behind watch

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

arguments for paleys observations not showing god exists

A

-Dawkins says natural selection blind process, no intention or purpose
-some natural things dont have purpose or poor design like wasp or human appendix
-law of entropy shows tendency to disorder so no designing mind
-to many faults in world to suggest god created it, volcanoes, murder

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

humes criticisms to analogies

A

-analogies can lead to mistaken conclusions, cant compare blood system to plants cells sap system
-philo from dialogues of natural religion shows how can you conclude to great god
-could there be many designers like how they build a ship

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

humes criticism with a posteriori arguments

A

-fallacy of composition- can apply observations to world cant apply to universe or entire world
-we cannot see or assume there is designing mind or god behind it

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

epicurean hypothesis as alternative reason to order of universe

A

-finite particles if given infinite time can fall into order by chance
-even though it may appear designed and arranged, due to constant motion and trial
-we can only observe current state because there is order

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

humes criticisms are right

A

-cannot assume just because watch has designer world has one to, no way of knowing
-design argument leap of logic to concluding monotheistic god
-design assumes intentional design rather than by random chance
-assumes fallacy of composition- whats true for a part true for whole

20
Q

humes criticisms dont work

A

-similar effects have similar causes, paley argues even if we havent seen watch, we would still assume designer, same for world
-hume takes analogy to far, many people agree with argument but not god of classical theism
-it seems more credible to argue for design than chance- cant expect watch to throw in air and come together for purpose
-paley doesnt say world has design but things in it

21
Q

Darwin and evolution

A

-natural selection
-survival of fittest
-less advantageous species die out and ones with advantageous mutations die out

22
Q

how does evolution challenge teleological argument

A

-if species survived due to adaptation there is no need for designer god
-if evolution random process, against qua regularity and design
-challenges status and dignity of humans because evolved same way as animals

23
Q

Dawkins in the blind watchmaker against paleys analogy

A

-argues evolution carried through random but cumulative mutations in DNA which produce variation in life
-process blind- no telos or plan
-therefore no need for designer god

24
Q

arguments arguing evolution explains design in the world

A

-evolution challenged design argument, explains regularity and design as chance, natural selection
-world only appears designed because humans have given it design, gives a posteriori evidence of natural explanation
-evolution natural process so no foresight plan or purpose in mind, dont need to infer a designing mind

25
Q

arguments for teleological arguments explaining design better than evolution

A

-unlikely order came from chance , wouldnt think watch appeared so world didnt appear but has designer
-modern teleological arguments- Tennat anthropic principle, god set up laws of physics and allows process of evolution
-broken watch, even damaged still designer, even if faults in world still designed
-Tennants aesthetic principle, why we appreciate art and music, not in nature so could indicate benevolent god allowing us to feel pleasure

26
Q

use of analogies strength to design arguments

A

–provides best explanation for argument
-when we cant observe something its empirically valid to turn to analogies
-if we can explain something, its reasonable to expect the unobservable but analogous thing to have an analogous explanation
Swinburne- arguments from analogy are common in scientific inference

27
Q

weakness humes objection to analogy in design argument

A

-it doesnt follow the similarity of two effects that they must have had similar causes
-just because effect of universe and effect of man made house same in complex and purpose
-doesnt follow they have same causes
-radically disanalagous creation of universe could be to anything we know
-artifacts mechanical so precise
-universe organic, natural and chaotic

28
Q

evaluation defending design argument analogies do work

A

-paleys argument not based on analogy
-he argues there is property which requires designer of complexity and purpose
-when complex individual parts put together by chance
-nature requires designer because has property
-illustration not analogy

29
Q

strength of 5 the way is its basis in natural theology

A

-aquinas accepts design argument shows there is some designer of power but not christian god in particular
-McGrath says aquinas natural theology a posteriori demonstration of the coherence of faith and observation
-supports faith

30
Q

doesnt support monotheism weakness of aquinas

A

-even if universe has designer
-doesnt support monotheism
-could be committee of gods
-dead god, apprentice or junior god

31
Q

evaluation defending design argument ockams razor

A

-Swinburne - one god explanation for universe more simple than multiple gods
-uniformity of laws of physics suggests single designer
-argument only seeks to show reasonable to believe in designer not what designer is like

32
Q

strength of design argument inductive and a posteriori

A

-Hume, Russell, Dawkins say not enough evidence to believe in god
-design argument directly target position by attempting inductive proof of god
-use a posteriori only to prove god exists

33
Q

humes problem of evil weakness to design argument

A

-focus on good and avoid evil
-cant conclude perfect god because of evil in world
-focus on natural evil and animal suffering following modern science
-

34
Q

P1 P2 humes problem of evil against design argument

A

P1 - only justified in believing what evidence suggests
P2- only have evidence of good and evil in world
-C1- we are only justified in believing imperfection exists
C2- belief in perfectly good being not justified

35
Q

evalutation defending design from problem evil

A

-paley- even if watch broken must have watch maker so must be with universe
-theodicies from problem of evil

36
Q

strength of design argument is its reliance on purpose

A

-difficult for atheistic and scientific approach to account and explain for
-paley said some complexities can be from chance but when with purpose there is design evident
-aquinas relies on purpose - we observe that entities act towards an end

37
Q

darwins theory of evolution against design argument

A

-natural selection shows nature doesnt have purpose and design
-wrong to assume type of complexity has purpose and therefore design

38
Q

weakness of tennants aesthetic principle

A

-perception of beauty might serve some evolutionary function we dont understand
-might be biproduct of something which does provide survival like mate attraction
-hard to prove aesthetic sense doesnt relate to evolution

39
Q

weakness of tennants anthropic principle

A

-conditions on earth precise but universe large
-should expect there to be many earths like planets by chance
-estimates of 6 billion earth like planets

40
Q

strength of aquinas developed by tennant and swinburne focus on temporal order

A

paley relys on order of objects in space spatial
-spatial cant justify belief in god because can be explained by evolution, epicurean, spatial disorder
-temporal is order of things behaviour over time due to physical laws
-hydrogen same everywhere since it first existed
-

41
Q

fine tuning as strength of aquinas Tennant and swinburne

A

-if laws of our universe lesser or more humans could have mot existed
-unlikely for chance to explain precise laws
-science can tell us E=mc2 but not why E=mc2

42
Q

swinburnes personal explanation

A

-experience temporal regularities caused by people
-choose to sleep at night
-explanation of those temporal regularities that they were designed
-intentionally created by intelligent mind
-only god has power to have designed laws of physics

43
Q

multiverse theory against design argument

A

-our universe one of infinite number of universes
-every single possible type or universe exists
-some chaotic and some have order
-Max Tegmark physicist- defeats fine tuning swinburne and design arguments

44
Q
A
45
Q
A

philosophy of religion (10 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions